President
Nixon circa 1970 invented corporate health care insurance for the
people of the United States. It was an early version of Obamacare.
Would it work today since Wall Street structure and globalization
have changed so much with computers, telecoms and deregulation?
Capital
is fluid in some investment forms more than others. Capitalization of
steel mills and shipyards is less fluid and transmorphic than the
near purity of bank capital. In the modern capital ecosphere the
insurance business is one of the few business fields that haven even
less invested in physical capital stock than banks (that are
positioned to take over properties in default or have loans to
property owners). Insurers merely promise to pay for claims in return
for ‘insurance’ payments that comprise a kind of rent. Insurers
have made a science of claims versus profits from rents ratios and
would not be in business without being able to receive a normal rate
of return on capital. The market rate of return on investment if
average at 5% would be the minimum the insurers would expect from
their capital or they would likely reallocate it to better business
investments. In effect the insurance business would be a close
approximation to a purely theoretical capital-investment-return
structure.
Nixon-care
was envisioned in an era when capital was far less fluid and
volatile. Globalism had not yet fused with computers and brilliant
quantitative trading algorithms. Capital in the Nixon administration
had a greater relationship to physical and national physical
structure than in the present era. The insurance capital today is
closer to being an abstract capital amendable to instant investment
decisions by insurers. If the insurance rate of return falls much
below the average for the market capital rate of return on investment
it can disappear from insurance investment use as quickly as
insurance contracts expire.
Obamacare
theoretically is a great unionization of consumers that makes partial
bond slaves of healthy youth who are compelled to pay for the high
insurance costs of sicker and older Americans. Plainly as Obamacare
ages and the supply of a z.p.g. America youth pool dries up; as the
formerly younger people age and draw upon insurance for-themselves
health insurance costs will skyrocket in the absence of a health pool
of exploitable bond-slaves.
Nixon-care/Obamacare
may have worked in the 1970s. A generation of uninsured Negroes would
have had health insurance resulting in the stop-loss of quite a few
avoidable deaths perhaps. Yet Senator Ted Kennedy was against
Nixon-care along with Democrat party leadership then. They wanted
full British-style national health care and would settle for nothing
less. Now, after forty years they have Nixon-care when the market has
changed and it is obsolete.
Levering
insurance costs through compulsory collective bargaining in effects
negotiates directly with the market average rate of return on
capital. It will never drop below the market average though, without
disappearing into better fields of investment. Thus health insurance
costs are more likely to rise or the quality of health care decrease
in the long run. Forced to buy insurance in one large body, insurance
companies that choose to participate with a lower rate of return can
reduce the quality of service and raise profit to the market average.
The
enslavement of American youth to subsidize health insurance costs are
regarded as being a sufficient tool to keep insurance cost down. As
mentioned earlier youth age too and that advantage theory will
capsize and become a Titanic reversal. So national policy with
Obamacare will require a huge influx of legal immigrants in the style
of a ponzi scheme to keep making subsidy payments before they age, or
youth and especially women will need to increase fecundity and create
large 19th
century size families.
One
way to actually reduce U.S. health costs would be to reduce the
period of patent exclusivity for manufacturing new technology or
drugs to just three years after expiration letting anyone manufacture
the product in return for giving 10% of profit to the original patent
holder for a century. Companies would be encouraged to invent more
and manufacturers could produce generic products for a fraction of
today’s medical-pharmaceutical costs. Supply and demand in
production is far more valuable in theory, at reducing health costs
than the effort to negotiate with pure capital and to reduce its rate
of return on investment average.
Capital
plainly has become less tied to physical structure in new ways
compared to the1970s. A capital management algorithm may reinvest
capital in numerous fields as they are predictively able to return an
above average profit temporally.
Compare
the health insurance business to a casinos. Gamblers want a lower
cost or a better share with increased odds of winning. Democrat
organizers pass a law to force all Americans into buying gambling
insurance against losses (for there are many losers and players that
aren’t allowed to gamble on credit because they already owe money
and can’t afford to play more). The vast left-wing union of
gamblers does force the casinos the lower their profit margin and
increase the odds of winning. Non-gambling healthy youth busy working
in a nearby salt mine 18 hour days are unhappy about subsidizing
gambling insurance for gambling that they don’t even use
themselves. Oh well.
The
casinos would have been boycotted if they didn’t cooperate with the
Democrat Party gambling union, and many just got disgusted and closed
their doors (that were just made of laser beams, holographs, smoke
and mirrors anyway) and reinvested their capital into a manure
reprocessing industry that paid the market average 5% rate of return.
Some casinos did stay in business though.
Those
casinos cut their costs to keep their profits at 5%. They got rid of
the showgirls, eliminated free breakfasts and dimmed the lighting.
Carpets became thread bear and gamblers were given extra charges for
renting seats to sit at roulette and poker tables. And then, after a
few years, the youth in the salt mine that had subsidized the costs
became old and sick and moved to the casino gambling all day too.
They played bingo as if there were no tomorrow and sadly, for many,
there wasn’t.
Democrat
party strategists devised a brilliant plan to keep the gamblers in
casino chips; flood the nation with legal and illegal aliens on a
regular, and secure temporal ponzi schedule at a ration of 4
immigrants for every aging gambler that requires subsidy. That turned
out to be a bigger gamble than before though, since capital was
global and the casino was seeking to ways to increase profit and
return on investment globally. For capital never rests content with
exist profit levels, unless in some instances, if it is inherited.
